Charlie Kirk, Human Rights, and a Divided America

I didn’t follow Charlie Kirk closely. I didn’t attend his events or subscribe to his podcasts. I was always intrigued by his content though. When I saw the news of his assassination, it hit me harder than I expected. My social media feeds have been flooded with his face, his words, his debates. What I can’t shake is why this man who I have not followed socially, who held his beliefs so firmly and welcomed debate with anyone willing to challenge him, has left such a mark on me.

I’m confused, though. I don’t understand why so many people hated him. In the content I’ve watched over the last few days, Charlie came across as a highly intelligent man, faithful in his belief in God, and unafraid of confrontation, something I’ve often struggled with myself. He was confident in his beliefs and opinions, but he also welcomed different perspectives.

Just because he disagreed didn’t mean he disrespected you, especially if you were respectful in return. He stood firm behind the words he said, because he truly believed in them. When I watch him debate, what stands out isn’t hate from him, it’s that the opposing argument that almost always resorted to insults instead of real engagement.

Was he perfect? Of course not. None of us are. But nothing I’ve seen makes him the kind of person who deserves to be hated, let alone publicly executed.

What Are Human Rights?

When I first started writing this, I didn’t know much about human rights. Charlie’s death pushed me to search for answers, and in the process, I discovered a basic truth: human rights are universal and inalienable. They aren’t political. They aren’t partisan. They exist simply because we are human.

Long before governments, there were laws like the Code of Hammurabi (1750 BCE), written to enforce rights like justice and fairness among others. John Locke argued that people are born with natural rights: life, liberty, and property, and that governments exist to protect them. Immanuel Kant grounded rights in the moral dignity of each human being. Aristotle didn’t write about “human rights” as we know them today, but his ideas about justice and virtue shaped later thought.

And America’s founders echoed these same truths in the Declaration of Independence, writing:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

In 1948, after the horrors of World War II, the world came together to write the articles of human rights in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).

Charlie Kirk’s assassination violated those rights. His right to life was taken. His freedom of thought, conscience, and religion silenced. His freedom of expression cut short by violence.

Division, Hate, and Jealousy

I keep circling back to a hard question: Why so much hate?

Maybe the hate wasn’t about his words at all. Maybe what people really resented wasn’t his opinions, but the confidence with which he carried them: the certainty of his faith and the strength of his convictions. Maybe people who hated him were jealous of that clarity. Because the truth is, many of us ARE uncertain, searching, questioning. He didn’t seem to question. And instead of disagreeing respectfully, many chose hatred.

Maybe the problem is that we’ve stopped asking questions. We’ve stopped listening. We’ve replaced curiosity with judgment.

As Ted Lasso said, “Be curious, not judgmental.”

Imagine if more of us approached political debates that way. Curious about why someone believes what they believe, instead of rushing to condemn them. How different would this country feel?

At its core, the point of debate is persuasion. We all want to be heard. And if we believe in something strongly enough, of course we want people on our side. That wasn't unique to Charlie Kirk. It’s what both political parties do every day. Abortion, gun rights, religion, insert any controversial topic, and you’ll find two sides fighting passionately to win.

But here’s the truth: winning can’t be the only goal. As a country, we have to decide how to build laws that reflect not just one side’s victory, but a compromise that protects all people. That’s where human rights matter most. They provide the foundation, the baseline, that keeps our debates from devolving into power struggles alone.

As a full-time college student, I spend every day on a college campus. That IS a place where ideas are created, challenged, observed, and even changed; that’s what makes it valuable. College is where students begin to gain independence, to develop their own thoughts and opinions, instead of simply regurgitating what we heard growing up at home.

I, for one, love my family, and I’ve been blessed with the opportunity to hear both sides… hard left and hard right. And I’ve got to tell you: living at the extremes is no way to live. Being open to hearing an opposing opinion is not only important, it’s necessary.

What Charlie Kirk brought to the American higher education system was real-life conversation. He brought perspective. He brought faith to some, even. Through his non-profit, Turning Point USA, he opened doors for students to debate, to disagree, and to sharpen their own beliefs in the process. If you take the time to step away from the hate you may have for his opinion and look instead at the space he created for dialogue, maybe it could change your perspective too.

And something else to consider; there is still room for other organizations to rise! Ones that provide opposition in a civil, non-violent manner. That’s how real dialogue grows, and how students can truly learn to see the world from more than one side.

Bottom line? No belief, no opinion, no disagreement should ever carry a death sentence.

That is not justice, it is the destruction of humanity.

It doesn’t matter if you loved Charlie Kirk or despised him. It doesn’t matter if you agreed with his words or wanted to argue every single one of them. Taking a life because of an opinion crosses a line that no society claiming to respect human rights can afford to cross. And I won’t pretend this is only one side’s fault. People on both sides of the aisle have fueled this fire. We’ve turned disagreement into warfare and forgotten that we are human beings before we are partisans. This isn’t a conservative issue or a liberal issue. It’s a human issue. When we reduce people to political labels, we lose sight of the basic truth that every person is more than their party.

My Fear and My Refusal to Stay Quiet

Writing this terrifies me.

I want to have opinions. I want to share them. And yet, I fear that speaking too loudly could change the course of my life or even affect my children’s lives. That’s the kind of fear political violence plants in ordinary people.

I’ve always been the one in the corner, keeping my mouth shut out of fear that someone might oppose me. I never had the confidence to stand my ground.

But that’s changing.

Silence is not the answer. If a public figure can be killed for his beliefs, what message does that send to the rest of us? Should we keep quiet? Should that fear rule us? No. The sharing of an opinion should NEVER be a death sentence.

Closing Thoughts

Charlie Kirk’s wife, Erika, was right. Her husband has been made a martyr. And maybe, just maybe, his death will serve as a reminder of what we’ve forgotten: that human rights are not optional, not partisan, not negotiable. We are living in a divided America. Hate has grown louder than dialogue.

And the most frustrating part? The answer has been in front of us for decades: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). These simple articles outline life, liberty, dignity, and security. The blueprint is right there. But instead of honoring it, we cherry-pick the parts that serve our own interests; or worse, discard it when it doesn’t fit the political agenda of the moment.

We’ve chosen to fight instead of protect.

To divide instead of unite.

To hate instead of honor humanity.

"Of All the ideas that became the United States, there's a line here that's at the heart of all the others:"

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

"It means if there's something wrong, those who have the ability to take action have the responsibility to take action." - Ben Gates, Disney's National Treasure.

Those words weren’t written for history books alone. They were written as a reminder that when human rights are trampled, silence is not an option.

We cannot live this way anymore. Division, hate, and political violence cannot define our future. We have a duty to demand better. Not only for ourselves and for our children, but for the generations to come!

I don’t have all the answers. But I know this: death to an innocent person because of their beliefs is unacceptable. It cannot be the path forward for ANY OF US.  The world doesn’t need more JUDGEMENT. The world needs more CURIOUSITY.

Thanks, Ted.

Maybe that’s the first step to remembering what human rights really mean.